VELLIKULANGARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,THRISSUR vs. THE ITO, THRISSUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The ITAT restored the appeal back to the NFAC for fresh adjudication on merits, emphasizing the need for detailed adjudication as required by law. The assessee was cautioned to present all relevant facts.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the NFAC due to continuous non-appearance. The ITAT noted that the NFAC's order did not decide the substantive grounds on merits.
What were the issues?
Whether the NFAC properly adjudicated the substantive grounds of appeal on merits, or if the ex-parte order was procedurally flawed by failing to provide a detailed adjudication.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji3,926 citing167 ITR 471 · 1987 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
Before: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh
2008-2009 arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) / NFAC vide DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1051242194(1) dated 24.03.2023, in proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act” hereinafter.
Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex parte.
It emerges during the course of hearing that the NFAC has noted the assessee’s continuous non-appearance in the lower appellate proceedings before rejecting it’s grounds vide . Vellikulangara SCB Ltd. ex-parte order under challenge. Learned Sr. DR could hardly dispute the clinching fact that the NFAC’s order has nowhere decided the assessee’s substantive grounds on merits as contemplated u/sec.250(6) of the Act requiring it to give points for determination followed by a detailed adjudication thereof. Faced with the situation, we deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the NFAC for it’s afresh adjudication, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing, subject to the rider that it shall be the taxpayer’s risk and responsibility only to file and prove all the relevant facts in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.
Delay of 45 days in filing the instant appeal is condoned as per assessee’s condonation averments and in light of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. MST Katiji [1987] 167 ITR 471 (SC) having settled the law long back that all such technical aspects must make a way for the cause of substantial justice.
Order pronounced in the open court on this 23rd day of October, 2024.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Basant Kumar Gupta vs. Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S Swapnashiyana Homes Developers Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S B.K. Agency Under The Proprietor Of Bhola Prasad vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGSTPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- Jashim Uddin vs. The State Of Assam And 5 OrsGauhati · 1 Nov 2026
- Mohammed Khadeer Baig vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 1 Nov 2026